From the “I Wish I Had Said That” department:

“Developers understandably want to make money. And city authorities like to sell valuable properties to collect taxes to augment the city coffers. But who considers the people’s heritage? The situation reminds us of what Chief Powhatan said to Capt. John Smith when Powhatan didn’t want to sell anymore corn to the early colonists because his wise men had already told him before 1607 that foreigners were going to come to take his land way from him. Powhatan told John Smith that he did not want to sell any of his corn. He said, “I can’t eat your copper, but I can eat my corn.” Powhatan wasn’t willing to sell his people’s livelihood for a handful of money.

Later, William Byrd gave to the town of Richmond all the land around Shockoe Creek as a commons for the people’s use exclusively. Now we have there some nice place for some to enjoy. I feel that some people are now willing to sell more of our region’s soul. Please don’t let any more land along the river become for the fortunate few only. Preserve it for everybody.”

That was Barbara Taggart of Richmond, who participated in last week’s “Public Square” sponsored by the Richmond Times-Dispatch. So nicely put.

If you feel the same, don’t forget to attend the final Planning Commission meeting on the Downtown Master Plan, Monday May 19th at 1:30PM on the 5th Floor of City Hall. Let your voice be heard.

If you happened to read my Back Page essay in Style Weekly a few weeks ago, you already know about the “visioning” that greater Richmond’s business community dreamed up while on their recent junket to Charleston, South Carolina.

These visions have taken flight, say the bigwigs. From Friday’s Richmond Times-Dispatch:

Spurred on by recommendations in the Crupi report, public and private interests created an alliance yesterday to plan for the future of the nine-locality Richmond region.

The Richmond Regional Planning District Commission voted unanimously to join and play a major role in the Capital Region Collaborative, which is an entity created by the Greater Richmond Chamber after the report was issued nearly six months ago.

“The planets are aligned; the timing is right,” said John E. Gordon Jr., a commission member who also is a Hanover County supervisor. “The region’s political and business leaders were following parallel paths, and now those paths have merged.”

A group of 40 business leaders and companies paid $150,000 for Texas-based business consultant James A. Crupi to evaluate the area. His report called the Richmond region an underachieving area that needed a plan for the future.

I want to stop here and underscore one of the quotes given above from Mr. Hanover County: “The region’s political and business leaders were following parallel paths, and now those paths have merged.”

This confirms who is really collaborating in this “Collaborative” — political and business leaders, a.k.a. the same old voices. And — surprise, surprise — they even know what direction they are going in. Now all these path mergers need is some sort of process to validate where it is they already want to go and it’s Showtime!

I’d like to keep an open mind, I really would. But the Capital Region Collaborative looks like one more in a series of Richmond old boys clubs spun off from the Chamber of Commerce where we see a limited gene pool of aging lawyers, energy executives, politicians and developers joining forces to pull all their puppet strings in unison. The big deal here is that a wider pool of bigwigs have joined this particular club.

This new public-private entity comes on the scene with alleged plans to involve the rest of us in whatever proposals have already been formulated by business leaders and their political friends on faraway junkets. Considering the plethora of recent studies and surveys and consultants that have spoken to the importance of community inclusion and transparency in Richmond (not to mention fairness, common sense and the cultivation of young people), one can only hope that the CRC goal is sincere and not just spin.

We learn from Friday’s article that Robert Grey, a lawyer at Hunton & Williams, will lead this new Capital Region Collaborative. You remember him, right? He led the city’s Performing Arts Committee two years ago. In the Times-Dispatch article, Mr. Grey sought to reassure the rest of us that everything will be just fine, don’t worry and be happy:

“Ours will be a process built on inclusiveness, transparency, engagement, accountability and sustainability.”

Problem is: When he said these words, Mr. Grey was all but channeling the performance he gave in May 2006, when the subject at hand was the non-existent public input that was being accepted by the Performing Arts Committee he chaired.

From Richmond.com, two years ago:

Robert Grey, chairman of the [performing arts] committee, said in the next 120 days the committee would solicit the public’s input “to make sure we are on track and are accountable to those whose funding we’re asking for.”

Of course, longtime Save Richmond readers remember what happened after that. The next time the city heard from Mr. Grey and his Performing Arts Committee, it was not to call a series of widely-advertised public meetings so that Richmond taxpayers and genuine arts professionals, patrons and performers could give input into a publicly-funded arts center project. No, it was to reveal to us that his committee had just hired an expensive consultant to change the name of the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation’s woeful arts center proposal to “CenterStage” and that everything was cool.

This was determined (according to Richmond.com)….

after interviewing more than 90 people in the Richmond metropolitan area regarding their perception of local performing arts.

So here is the benchmark for accountability and public input that was set by Mr. Grey and his earlier committee of the connected — a whole 90 people “in the Richmond metropolitan area” (meaning: unnamed folks who live in the counties) giving their opinions to a private consultant about a name change and the public “perception” of a project that was being funded exclusively by city (not county) residents, one that had already wasted $10 million of city (not county) dollars.

Is this the kind of thorough public input and accountability we can expect from the Capital Region Collaborative? If so, God help us.

While I’m on the subject, let’s stop for a minute and talk about the Downtown Master Plan, which many within the business community and the city’s planning commission resented for its citizen-first (as opposed to developer- and VCU-suckling) approach (take a look at the revised and edited plan and count the red marks for yourself). The Master plan was conceived and approved by a truly Democratic group of hundreds of area citizens — not just a knitting circle of connected corporate figures (although they were part of the process too — see how this “inclusion” stuff works?). Up to this point, the public process for the hotly-debated plan has been thorough, transparent and well-attended.

So it is sad to note the incredibly inconvenient time slated for the planning commission’s final public hearing on the Master Plan — scheduled for 1:30PM on Monday, May 19th (5th Floor, City Hall). Why does one get the feeling that there will be more people of independent means at this particular meeting, as opposed to everyday citizens who have normal 9-5 jobs? Did I mention that it was the FINAL meeting?

At least the planning commission is giving us all advance warning. Mr. Grey’s Performing Arts Committee was incapable of that — in their year together, that committee held one single public meeting where taxpayers could theoretically ask questions. This meeting was not advertised or widely-announced, and members of the press were notified so late that they could not report in advance on the meeting.

Inclusiveness, transparency, engagement, accountability — nowhere to be found.

Sustainability? Who cares… as long as someone else — Joe Taxpayer — is footing the bill.

In short, it’s nice to hear that “the region’s political and business leaders are following parallel paths and now those paths have merged.” Whether or not the rest of us will be asked to go along on this particular walk — instead of being the ones consistently walked on — is the outstanding question of the day.

High-ranking city officials caught with illegal $23,000 car allowances?

Piffle.

Mayor uncovers $2 million in wasteful city spending?

Yawn.

This is baby spit compared to the five years of public money wrangled and wasted by the downtown project now being referred to as “CenterStage.” This beast is one of the very few things that our mayor and city council can agree on (which says a lot about this city and its priorities) — and there will no doubt be millions more in public dollars thrown down this particular hole before it’s over. All because this is the long-burning pet project of our biggest wigs and the city’s more prominent political contributors, boosters and school superintendent choosers.

As you read the following letter from Jerrold Samford, the head of the Alliance For the Performing Arts, to the arts groups that are affiliated with the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation and its “CenterStage” project, see if you can figure out why it would be so “unfortunate” for VAPAF/CenterStage to have to disclose to the press and the general public basic information about a project being largely funded by the public.

Could this “unfortunate” information be the current totals of VAPAF/CenterStage’s recent fundraising efforts, which the Foundation refused to disclose to the Richmond Times-Dispatch? Nope. Turns out that yet another VAPAF/CenterStage executive director has resigned, but will soon be joining other privledged insiders as a special “consultant” to the project.

Serious fun, indeed.

To All Alliance Participants:

I need to share with everyone an unfortunate incident that affects the Alliance and its ability to continue to operate in the manner we have in the past. We are approaching our 9th anniversary (June) and will celebrate many accomplishments with the construction of Richmond CenterStage being almost half done (my unofficial estimate). Throughout that time we have been able to pursue our activities by building trust between organizations that had not talked to each other in the past, much less talked openly about themselves in front of the others. We also were able to work closely with the Foundation on sensitive issues as they developed and were resolved, almost as if we were one organization; with the trust that each would respect the other’s needs and secure in knowing we were all working towards the same objective.

The Alliance has had a completely open door policy for every meeting and has invited participation in these activities from all sectors of local and regional performing arts organizations. As of last week, the trust we have placed in this policy has been severely damaged. During the meeting last week, Bob Mooney shared some confidential information regarding re-alignment of their internal management, particularly regarding Linda Dalch Jones accepting a consulting position with the Foundation and stepping away from her role as Executive Director. Although it should not have been necessary for him to do so, Bob specifically noted to the members that this information was still confidential and had not yet been shared even with the Foundation’s Board. Unfortunately, within an hour of the end of the meeting, Bob received a phone call from the press asking for more information about this “story.”

While nobody can (or will even try to) prove “conclusively” that someone present at that meeting called the press and reported this story, the timing and information described by the press makes it difficult to imagine this as mere coincidence. I have been completely baffled in trying to understand what might motivate one of our participants to breach the trust placed in them and the organization like this. I want to believe that it was coincidence, but find that difficult.

Consequently, after discussing this with Bob, we have agreed that the Foundation will no longer share any sensitive or confidential information with the Alliance at any time prior to its release to the general public. I also ask Keith Martin as head of the Resident Company Association and Bill Martin as head of the Regional Cultural Action Plan process to adopt the same policy, and I suspect individual member organizations within the Alliance will also treat their sensitive information the same way. The Alliance still has much good work it can accomplish: developing regional cooperation, mutually rewarding promotional materials, collaborative productions, and generally improving the business climate for performing arts in the area. We need to focus on the good stuff we can do, and we will need to find a way to rebuild the trust that has been lost.

I would welcome any thoughts or ideas you might have by email, phone, or in person.

Jerry.

Got that, performing arts companies of Richmond? From now on, you will be as in-the-dark about this project as the rest of the city’s residents — even though it is allegedly being built for your benefit.

How ironic that the National Theatre has been successfully renovated, and opened, in just over two years time (and for about half of the money that VAPAF spent digging a hole and then filling it up). Please compare and contrast the success story that is the privately-financed National — an endeavor overseen by arts professionals who know what they are doing — with the record of achievement posted by the publicly-funded Virginia Performing Arts Foundation / “CenterStage” over the past five years:

- Read how VAPAF tried to hold up the private sale of the National here and here.

- Find out here how the overseers of the arts center have failed to commission a single independent feasibility study of any of their multi-million dollar plans, and how they have neglected to solicit even the smallest amount of community input for their proposals.

- Did you know VAPAF was once planning to build a facade of an arts center with nothing inside (no Blazing Saddles jokes, please)? See here.

- Right here, read about how VAPAF squandered the Carpenter Center’s endowment, and see how little money they actually had while publicly claiming to have “raised” nearly $80 million.

- Read how out-of-town consultants make a mint at Richmond’s biggest ongoing boondoggle here and here.

- Get educated here on how VAPAF fired the longtime director of the Carpenter Center, Joel Katz, for daring to speak truth to power, and how the Foundation refused to turn over their much-cited “reams of evidence” to reporters.

- Read the City Auditor’s damning 2005 report on VAPAF’s incompetent fundraising here and find out for yourself how the Foundation and Richmond City Council have “operated in the past.”

- Read how the ongoing waste and incompetence of VAPAF/CenterStage has hurt the region’s performing arts community here.

- Find out here how the Foundation’s former executive director claimed in the press that he took a salary cut, when he actually didn’t, and how his public assertions that “not a penny” of his salary came from Richmond taxpayers turned out to be false. Please note the 18-month lagtime between Save Richmond breaking this news and the daily newspaper’s reporting of it.

- Read here what Mayor L. Douglas Wilder had to say about the arts center project in 2005. “This was supposedly a privately funded thing… how anything like that could have gotten off the ground in the first instance is beyond me.” After reading it, click here and contemplate why Wilder would later reverse course and end up OK’ing a proposal which sees the City of Richmond paying even more to the Foundation and handing over control of the Carpenter Center for 99 years.

- Here, you can see how the Mayor’s “Performing Arts Committee” turned out to be a complete, time-wasting sham, and how VAPAF President Robert Mooney actually crafted the so-called “independent” committee’s final report.

- Read about how City Council and the Mayor combined forces — when they can agree on little else — to keep the boondoggle going here and here.

- Watch in terror as City Council President — and former VAPAF board member — Bill Pantele shuts off council debate on the funding of the project here. See Councilwoman Ellen Robertson make absolutely no sense as she casts a “yes” vote for the boondoggle here. Watch as Councilman and former VAPAF critic Marty “Profiles in Courage” Jewell changes his mind and votes “yes” to continue funding the farce here. See how Bruce Tyler is one of the few on council to ask detailed and serious questions of the project here.

- Right here, you can read how VAPAF/Centerstage officials claimed that they needed their project greenlighted immediately without more public debate because of “sub-contractor issues,” claims later proven to be false; and also find out more about Bill Pantele’s very close and personal ties to VAPAF President Robert Mooney.

- Click here and here to find out how VAPAF intends to hand over management of the Carpenter Center and Landmark Theater to a company that has little experience operating performing arts theatres — one that has been criticized in the past for bilking Richmond taxpayers.

- You can read here how the general public will be unable to file Freedom of Information requests to find out how VAPAF/CenterStage and its outsourced entities spend public tax money.

- You can find out right here what the region’s performing arts community really thinks of VAPAF/CenterStage, and how the arts companies themselves rejected a move by the Foundation to form a “cultural trust” to administer city arts funds. Quote for the ages: “There’s hidden humor in the idea of calling something the ‘cultural trust’ if it involves the Performing Arts Foundation.”

And last but not least:

- Here, you can laugh AND cry as you witness how one recently-announced candidate for Mayor is unable to spell… and how he has plans, if elected, to spend even more of our tax money expanding the “whole” on Broad.

Man, I really hate to beat up on a school administration when it is down.

But if you were one of those “glass half full” folks who reacted to the City Auditor’s devastating analysis of the wasteful procurement practices of Richmond Public Schools by pointing out the recent (on paper) high SOL score results of city public school students, you might want to grab a box of tissue and a FULL pint of strong lager before you sit down and peruse John Butcher’s analysis of RPS’ high suspension rates. This is a little matter that has already been explored in depth here and here by Chris Dovi at Style Weekly, but this report puts the system’s suspension policies into some broader perspective.

As is shown, RPS’ high suspension rates have greatly affected the “impressive” recent SOL scores by Richmond middle school and high school students. Former state attorney Butcher’s analysis of this is damning. His conclusions [emphasis mine]:

The suspension rates are very high in some of our schools. And the rates are increasing. That suggests an ongoing failure of leadership from downtown.

These data point in the same direction as the high dropout rate and the very low graduation rate: Richmond is improving its SOL scores by chasing out the poorer performers.

Read the full report here.

And, no, Ms. Jewell-Sherman, you can not have a “redo” on this one either.

… and this is why we like Umesh V. Dalal, Richmond’s current City Auditor: When he audits, he really audits.

For example, take the man’s long-awaited report on the procurement and accounts payable practices of Richmond City Schools — it’s required reading if you have any interest at all in whether or not Mayor L. Douglas Wilder might have a point when he goes nuclear on RPS for “waste and inefficiency.”

But this analysis of where $55 million in school funds end up is also a horror story. That is if you are a parent with a child in the Richmond city school system. No wonder Dalal himself lives in Henrico County.

Among many jaw-droppers detailed in this audit — read the executive summary here, the full report here and the School Adminstration’s reaction here — Dalal found that:

- The internal controls for following procedure and ensuring lawful practices in the procurement and accounts payable processes were “significantly weak.”

- Two interactive, computerized classroom projection systems are missing. These cost a total of $7,000.

… and so on. There is more. Lots more. Too much more. (Memo to Superintendent Deborah Jewell-Sherman: This is not a “redo,” whatever that is. This is an old-fashioned “F.”) When you read the full report, you instantly understand why Richmond’s school administration fought this kind of an audit of their procurement and accounts payable practices with such fervor … and why such an audit has been long overdue.

These findings will no doubt embolden the Mayor’s attacks on RPS — ironic, since he has infamously cut the budget of the Auditor’s office because of a petty feud with Dalal. But the thoroughness of this report should make us all wonder what Dalal and his staff would find if they were allowed to audit the finances and procurement practices of all other city departments in the same way they’ve scrutinized the schools.

How about it, Mr. Mayor?

Note: Exactly two weeks ago, my computer “crashed” and left a couple of Save Richmond blog entries stranded or in a state of unfinished flux. Now that the ol’ hardware is back to normal — whew! — I present the following entry as it would have appeared on Friday, March 23rd.

PS: City Council ended up passing the legislation being discussed below by a vote of 8-1. No surprise there.

* * * * * * * * *

We’ll soon see a real-time tutorial on how things really happen around here - with very little fuss, just some “notwithstandings” and “wherebys” on a nebulously-worded ordinance passed with little debate at our local City Council. Whether this one particular piece of paper up for grabs on Monday night is another groaning example of City bureaucracy, or a bald-faced power grab on behalf of outside interests, is what is up for debate.

At hand is a proposed little ordinance (paper 2007-235), sponsored by our friends Bill Pantele and Ellen Robertson, which would initiate an “Inspector General” function within the office of the City Auditor and also establish an “Inspector General Oversight Board,” which would audit this new Inspector General, and be largely appointed by City Council.

If you are confused because you thought we already had something called a City Audit Committee, worry not. We do. And according to the City Auditor’s own website, this particular group oversees the City Auditor’s Office. I guess you’d call them the auditors of the Auditors.

So why do we need an “Inspector General Oversight Board”? To oversee the Inspector General. And it turns out that our first Inspector General will be the current City Auditor, who is also appointed by City Council — who is already monitored by the City Audit Committee.

OK… dizzy yet?

The Monday ordinance before Council would establish and empower this newly-created Board, which would not only seem completely superfluous, it would also enjoy a very special status. [emphasis mine]:

” There shall be an Inspector General Oversight Board. The board shall consist of seven members.

Of the board’s seven members, three members shall be the citizen members of the Audit Committee, one member shall be an auditor currently or formerly employed with the office of the State Auditor of Public Accounts, one member shall be a law enforcement officer currently or formerly employed by the Virginia State Police and not employed by the Department of Police or the City Sheriff, one member shall be an auditor with a private accounting or auditing firm that does not hold a contract with the City, and one member shall be an attorney currently or formerly employed with the city’s Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office.

Each member of the Audit Committee shall serve on the Board for a term coincident with the member’s term on the Audit Committee.”
“The remaining four members shall be appointed by the Council for a term of six years from the date of appointment. Each member of the Audit Committee shall serve on the Board for a term coincident with the member’s term on the Audit Committee. The remaining four members shall be appointed by the Council for a term of six years from the date of appointment. Notwithstanding sections 2-836 and 2-837 of this code to the contrary, the members of the Board shall not be subject to any term limits or to any requirement that they maintain a residence or a principal place of employment in the city. “

And the parts of the City Code being suspiciously notwithstanded are [excerpts]:

Sec. 2-836. Eligibility of members to succeed themselves; term of members.

(b) Unless otherwise specified by general law, ordinance or resolution, the term of office for the members of any board, commission, or committee the members of which are appointed by the council shall be three years.

Sec. 2-837. Removal of members; forfeiture of office.

(b) Any person who is appointed to membership on a board or commission after July 8, 1983, except those subject to subsection 2-936(a) and who shall thereafter cease to maintain a permanent residence within the city or who terminates qualifying employment within the city shall thereby forfeit membership on the board or commission of which such person is a member.

It’s an interesting document. Look at the requirements for those who can serve on the oversight board. While auditors, prosecutors and police officers are specified, there are no specific qualification minimums to make sure future board picks would be up to the job and qualified. Under this law, if passed, just about anyone could be appointed and then get to choose and oversee the Inspector General of Richmond. They could all live in Chesterfield, Henrico and/or Hanover County — or Timbuktu — and the appointments would be perfectly legal.

I need to stop right here and make something clear. I like and greatly admire Umesh V. Dalal, our current City Auditor and proposed new Inspector General. But he was already famously exempted from living in the city by City Council. And he won’t be Inspector General forever. We can’t count on our next IG being anything like him, so the rules that govern this new office and its regulatory board are kind of important . In fact, with the level of public servant we are accustomed to getting in Richmond, it is not science fiction to worry that the next appointee might be a bald-faced political hack with an agenda.

Think I’m being overly dramatic? Consider this: Unlike the model legislation for these kinds of “Inspector General” oversight functions, Richmond’s future Inspectors won’t have to be Certified in their field.

Still think this is a good piece of legislation?

OK, let’s review: A newly-created board of important evaluators who will be dispatched to oversee the important work of Richmond’s new Inspector General will not be required to live here in Richmond. Moreover, these folks will be permitted to skirt City Code by staying twice as long on an important oversight body as is customary. And they simply have to be auditors, lawyers, police officers and “citizen members of the Audit Committee” — under these rules, literally anyone could end up being Inspector General or a member of this board.

Did I happen to mention that City Council largely appoints the members of this new body, as well as those on the City Audit Committee? And did I let you know that council already appoints the City Auditor? Oh, I did. OK. Now can anyone out there in blog-land say — with a straight face — that this is a setup that is designed to foster future independent oversight of, oh, say…. City Council?

No, this sounds like a recipe for future political hackery… and perhaps even a naked power grab. But I contacted Mayoral candidate Paul Goldman and he says not so fast. This is actually another example of the City’s wasteful bureaucracy.

Goldman: “That’s why I propose amending the City Charter to turn the City Treasurer into an independent City Controller with audit power and investigatory power to make sure the people’s money is spent as promised and not wasted. Why not have the person responsible for making sure the politicians are not wasting our money accountable to the people, not chosen by friends of the very politicians he/she is suppose to be keeping tabs on! The last thing we need is another expensive bureaucrat appointed by the system to keep the system honest: I say let that person be only responsible to the voters, and be truly independent of the Mayor and City Council.”

Me: What is Council’s motive here with establishing this board?

Goldman: “By saying they want yet another appointed body, they are in effect making my case by saying the people responsible to them have not done the job BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAS NOT INSISTED THEY DO IT!! So why should yet another Council created- and effectively appointed body do any better?”

Good question.

Whatever this is — bureaucracy or power grab — we can all agree that paper 2007-235 at Monday’s City Council meeting looks to be another sad case of business as usual.

The Klu Klux Klan hold a parade in Richmond
(Photo from the Historic Richmond site).

Coincidence? The same year (1915) that D.W. Griffith released his audacious cinematic epic, Birth of a Nation, a reconstituted Klu Klux Klan was founded and began to thrive. The organization eventually gained up to three million members in the years to follow — and why not? It had arguably the greatest, biggest, film of its day serving as an ace recruitment tool.

The top movie director of his day, Griffith’s father had served in the Confederate Army during the Civil War. His film was originally called “The Clansman,” and it was not only the first motion picture to be shown in the White House (to Woodrow Wilson), it was also the first to break the 100 minute mark and ushered in the age of Hollywood excess — budgeted at $40,000, it eventually cost three times that.

In Griffith’s admittedly exciting and cinematically-involving movie, the original members of the KKK that formed in the days following Reconstruction come off as swashbuckling protectors of Southern American virtues — an army of heroic Indiana Jones’ in white sheets. Its depiction of African-Americans is an abomination — the zombies in Night of the Living Dead are afforded more humanity. Let’s leave it at that.

Noted Southern folklorist Stetson Kennedy reports on how the Richmond chapter of the Klu Klux Klan operated when the organization reformed in the early 20th century:

A typical bit of Ku Kluxery came when Mrs. J. W. Sweat, a Negro schoolteacher who had moved into a white neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, received a letter containing a bullet and a note from the K.K.K. reading: You are not smart.

The exemplary DJ and conceptual landscape artist Paul D. Miller — alias DJ Spooky — will perform his new multi-media recasting of D.W. Griffith’s still-polarizing paean to the Klan, and to the “Old South,” at the University of Richmond’s Modlin Center on Wednesday. We can call this a Genuine Event, folks: A radical and wickedly entertaining de-construction of Griffith’s racist tract held in the former Capitol of the Confederacy.

The performance begins at 7:30 at UR’s Alice Jepson Theatre, and the DJ will have a “talk back” session after the screening. As Miller explains at his website:

Griffith’s film has been a historical object of fascination for me for a long while - it’s been one of the defining images of America in the 20th century. As we enter the 21st Century it sometimes helps to know like the philosopher Santayana said so long ago, that “those who do not understand the past are doomed to repeat it.”

“Birth of a Nation” focuses on how America needed to create a fiction of African American culture in tune with the fabrication of “whiteness” that undergirded American thought throughout most of the last several centuries: it floats out in the world of cinema as an enduring albeit totally racist - epic tale of an America that, in essence, never existed. The Ku Klux Klan still uses this film as a recruiting device and it’s considered to be an American “cinema classic” despite the racist content.

By remixing the film along the lines of dj culture, I hoped to create a counter-narrative, one where the story implodes on itself, one where new stories arise out the ashes of that explosion.

DJ Spooky will also make an in-store appearance at Plan 9 Records in Carytown on Tuesday at 5PM.

You say you know that Richmond is absolutely bonkers, run by people who might actually be off their nut… but can you be completely certain?

Time to take the test. Yes, that’s right, I’m talking to you — the guy with the bloodshot eyes, sniffly nose and chattering teeth. Are you READY to take the “EZ 2 LOVE YOUR CRAZY AS #@%&* CITY” Quiz and get knowledged by such things as Unity councils, mayoral diatribes that could also serve as gangster movie dialogue and constrictive city budgets that still somehow leave room for 19% pay raises and escalating public relations costs? Yes, I’m talking to you (here’s a Kleenix) — and, no, that’s not just Nyquil playing tricks on you, this is actually THE LOONEY-TUNES PLACE WHERE YOU LIVE!!!

What was that? You say, you’ve already rented a moving van — not paid for by fellow taxpayers, alas — to get out of this #@%&* City??!! All the more reason to take the “EZ 2 LOVE YOUR CRAZY AS #@%&* CITY” Quiz and to take it right now!! All you have to lose is more of your dignity…

1. Mayor L. Douglas Wilder recently unveiled his city budget, announcing that “money is tight.” The mayor proclaimed that “Those who want to act as if the city coffers are full and growth is robust or will rebound quickly are deluding both themselves and the residents of Richmond.” Which of the following is an example of our fiscally-responsible Mayor’s belt-tightening?

A. He budgeted a 30 percent increase for his press secretary’s office
B. He gave a 19% pay raise to his Chief Financial Officer, which means that the CFO now makes more than the state’s Secretary of Finance
C. He awarded a $170,000 salary for his Chief Administrative Officer, who has been on the job only six months and makes 28% more than her predecessor.
D. He gave all other City Hall employees a 2 percent pay raise.
E. He budgeted a 20 percent pay increase for the Police Chief, who now makes more than the Superintendent of the Virginia State Police.
F. His budget left necessary programs unfunded, such as mental health programs for the city jail.
G. He proposed a new utility charge for rainstorm runoffs.
H. He proposed a whopping 0.6% increase in funding for city schools.
I. He implemented very few of the City Auditor’s suggestions for lowering the city’s high administrative costs.
J. The Mayor did all of those things.

2. Members of City Council have recommended cutting the real estate tax rate by three cents. Mayor Wilder is against this and calls it an disingenuous election year trick. But the Mayor’s recent approval of a 28% increase in top Richmond administrative salaries for his staff is approximately equal to how much of the city’s real estate tax rate?

A. a quarter of a penny
B. a half of a penny
C. 3/4 of a penny
D. A whole penny

3. From the following, please pick a highly-charged statement that a city council member has NOT recently leveled at Mayor L. Douglas Wilder or a member of the Mayor’s team.

A. Councilperson Bill Pantele accused the Mayor’s office of money laundering… then retracted the statement.
B. Councilperson Ellen Robertson called the city’s CAO “a criminal”… then apologized and said that she had made the charge in error four times.
C. Councilperson Chris Hilbert threatened to subpoena members of the Mayor’s staff to find out who instructed budget officials to transfer $500,000 to pay for the failed move of Richmond schools… then didn’t.
D. Councilperson Marty Jewell stated that it was he — and not Reva Trammell or Douglas Conner — who was the Mayor’s biggest and most shameful bootlicker on Richmond City Council… then he retracted his comments and said it might be Conner after all.

4. One of the following statements was taken from a recent L. Douglas Wilder press conference where the Mayor lambasted city councilwoman Ellen Robertson for her comments concerning the city’s CAO. The other three statements are taken from the dialogue of the Quentin Tarantino movie, Pulp Fiction. Which are Wilder’s words?

A. “I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.”
B. “I don’t believe in pulling out a pistol to tell you I’m going to shoot you. I believe differently. I believe in shooting you if that’s going to have to be the case. I don’t have to pull it out and show it to you.”
C. “Mr. 9mm here, he’s the shepherd protecting my righteous a** in the valley of darkness.”
D. “Nobody kills anyone in my store except me and Zed.” [Doorbell rings] “That’s Zed.”

5. Chief Financial Officer Harry “Zed” Black is receiving a 19% payraise from the Mayor for his outstanding performance on the job this past year. From the following, please pick one that is an actual Harry Black achievement from the past year.

A. He informed City Council employees that they would have to reapply for their jobs or be terminated.
B. He withheld approved funding to Richmond schools, an action that the City Auditor lambasted as being inappropriate.
C. Richmond City Council rejected his nomination as Chief Administrative Officer.
D. He issued two no-bid contracts to a Washington D.C.-based accounting firm to conduct outside audits of the Richmond school system and the assessor’s office… All without council’s permission.
E. He fired the legislative services director when he had no authority to do so.
F. He was the one who ordered the Richmond police force to initiate what became infamously known as “Fiasco Friday.”
G. He pushed the multi-million dollar CenterStage project through on fictitious “sub-contractor” issues, and without the benefit of an economic study, and then later claimed that the city money funding the venture should not be counted as an administrative expense.
H. All of these are Harry Black achievements.

6. L. Douglas Wilder’s former adviser Paul Goldman recently announced that he will run for Mayor against his former boss. Of the following, which is NOT a stated plank in the Goldman For Mayor platform?

A. Mayor Goldman would form a “Unity Council” to advise him. This inclusive mix of residents would include citizen representatives, members of the “business community,” neighborhood association reps, the head of the Richmond PTA and others.
B. Mayor Goldman would begin taking steps to turn Richmond into a place that champions green technology and modern health sciences, encourages and includes those in the professional and creative arts, and works on job creation.
C. Mayor Goldman would cut the city’s bureaucratic red tape by identifying millions in bloated upper-administrative costs and eliminating them.
D. Mayor Goldman would make a semi-annual report to the City that would report on the accountability of his administration.
E. Mayor Goldman would make the construction of a new, rad skateboard park a priority — and a regionally-financed priority at that.
F. Mayor Goldman would hold all of his press conferences in front of Ellwood Thompson’s Natural Foods Market.

7. Norfolk’s elected officials are currently debating whether or not to change to a “strong mayor” system of government like Richmond’s. Which of the following is an actual statement about the “strong mayor” form of government from a Norfolk City official?

A. Norfolk Councilman W. Randy Wright excitedly pointed to Richmond’s example and the $100,000 cost of “Fiasco Friday” and said, “We want some of that. We haven’t bilked our local taxpayers enough for petty internal squabbling.”
B. Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim enthusiastically pointed to Richmond’s example and stated “I’d love to get sued by everyone and then make insensitive statements in public about shooting my political enemies, that’s kind of my dream.”
C. Norfolk Councilman Don Williams warily pointed to Richmond’s example and said, “You could get someone who is charismatic and has no idea how to manage things” — meaning Richmond’s current leadership.
D. Norfolk Vice-Mayor Anthony Burfoot drooled as he pointed to Richmond’s example and stated that he looked forward to his future 19% pay raise.

8. Last year, a group of connected business leaders known as “The Gang of 26″ wrote a letter proposing that Richmond’s public schools were so fraught with administrative waste that they believed that school board members should be chosen by the Mayor and the business community rather than be Democratically elected.
So what has been the “Gang of 26’s” reaction to the excessive pay raises for L. Douglas Wilder’s staff and other embarrassing revelations concerning the high administrative costs of City Hall, which come at a time when corporate America is limiting its own payraises and implementing new hiring freezes?

A. Utter, inexplicable silence.

9. Richmond’s school board recently voted for a new public school budget that many critics hoped would address longtime charges that the school administration is top-heavy with administrative waste. School officials argue that their budget has been effectively “frozen” the past three years. Which of the following is a true fact about the new schools budget?

A. The budget includes more money for magazines for teachers and administrators than it does for new books for some elementary school libraries.
B. Despite a large transportation component — which has been shown to be bloated and rife with corrupt practices — the schools budget continues to charge families more than any of the surrounding localities for driver’s education classes.
C. The budget fails to implement most of the City Auditor’s recommendations for saving money through consolidating duplicate services.
D. School board members decided against filling 20 middle and high school teacher openings in the budget.
E. The budget assumes that the school system will not have to pay the Virginia Retirement System $1.9 million — and it is not clear if that is a valid assumption.
F. The budget does little or nothing to address Richmond Public School’s high administrative overhead, a constant criticism of Mayor L. Douglas Wilder.
G. All of these are budgetary priorities in the current schools budget.

10. The President of the Richmond Council of PTAs recently objected to the school system’s “open enrollment” policy, which enables parents to send their kids to schools outside of their district zones. President Tichi Pinkney-Eppes was quoted as saying that the program was “a farce” with a process that was being unfairly circumvented by white parents, which helped in creating separate but unequal city schools. What happened next?

A. The school administration agreed with her and proposed a fairer, more equitable way of open enrollment.
B. “The Gang of 26″ immediately wrote a letter that said whatever the Mayor wanted them to say.
C. Pinkney-Eppes began using an unfortunate “pistol” analogy to explain her position further.
D. Pinkney-Eppes was forced to resign from her day job at the non-profit “Communities in Schools” organization, and blamed school administration officials for pressuring her bosses to keep her quiet.

Answers:
1. J 2. D 3. D 4. B 5. H. 6. F 7. C 8. A 9. G 10. D

Hear ye, Hear ye: All those who have something to say about Richmond’s public school system. Speak out now or forever hold yer griping and/or praise.

Tonight, there is a public meeting on tap to discuss the future of our schools. And the issues addressed (or mis-addressed, according to your point of view) affect us all. Friends, don’t pass up this rare opportunity to be heard before big decisions are made on behalf of your tax dollars and Richmond’s schoolchildren.

Even if you can’t attend the meeting, be informed and let your voice be heard. School board member Carol Wolf, the sponsor of tonight’s gathering, explains the importance in a letter sent out today:

Dear Friends & Neighbors,

Your help is needed.  Our school system is at risk for losing some of its best principals because central administration refuses to pay them what they are worth and the surrounding county school systems are attempting to hire away our best and brightest.  I have tried to get the people on the 17th-floor of City Hall to understand that Richmond Public Schools cannot afford to lose talented principals who understand how to run a school, keep quality teachers and engage the community.

One would think that with a proposed budget of more than a QUARTER BILLION dollars ($269,217,496.00 to be exact), that the highly-paid central administrators downtown could manage to find a way to reward the principals who are making positive differences in the lives of our children, teachers and neighborhoods. 

One would also think that last year’s closings of Third District Schools — Norrell, Norrell Annex, 13 Acres and REAL School — there would have been sufficient cost savings that could be used to establish an International Baccalaureate (I.B.) program north of the River at Henderson Middle School. 

Why Henderson?  Under the excellent leadership of Dr. Dionne Ward, Henderson is THE ONLY middle school in the city that has been accredited for five years in a row.  And, last year Dr. Ward and her excellent staff helped Henderson’s students achieve the highest all around scores.  Henderson students have also won the City-Wide Spelling Bees for the last three years in a row.

Instead of moving forward with finding new uses for the schools that were closed, the four buildings currently sit empty and useless.  Several community groups have asked to be able to “re-cycle” these buildings for worthwhile uses and we have been waiting for an answer for more than a year. 

Please join me at a Town Meeting on Thursday [tonight] from 6:30-8:30 pm at Holton Elementary School to discuss the Superintendent’s proposed budget and what priorities you think are most important for the success of our schools and our city.  I apologize for the late notice.  This town meeting was announced February 19th and confirmed on February 20th.  Unfortunately, some communication snafu prevented central administration from getting flyers delivered to the schools until today. 

I do hope that despite the late notice that you will find the time to attend.  If you cannot, please e-mail any questions or concerns you have to the School Board [click here to find your representative]. The School Board will vote on the Budget this coming Monday, March 3, 2008. 

Respectfully,

Carol A.O. Wolf
Third District Member
Richmond School Board

BTW: I can’t speak for Ms. Wolf, but these official “communication snafus” and “typing errors” related to public notification and input are really starting to concern me. How about you? Honestly, I can only take about fifty more years of this kind of stuff before I’m going to start thinking something weird is going on.

Click here to see a copy of the Superintendent’s Proposed Budget 2008-2009 in PDF form.

Richmond City Council is due to vote tonight on the Richmond Public Schools Facility Master Plan update — which details the closing of old schools and the building of new ones. Millions and millions of dollars are at stake, and so is a coherent vision for the future of our public schools.

Only problem is: The plan that has been made available for citizen perusal on the city council website — attached to the ordinance — is missing half of its pages (we get the odd ones, not the even ones).

This is particularly strange because a complete pdf version of the plan has been available on the RPS website for some time now. You can read it here. Nope, I don’t think we can blame the schools administration for this one. Or the Mayor’s office. This would appear to be all Richmond City Council’s doing.

Of course, this won’t be the first time that Council has not provided the full information to taxpayers on what they are voting on. But normally, this only happens when the ordinance involves huge amounts of public money being funneled to secretive private-partnerships. Of course, any other community would update this ordinance immediately with the full plan, and then wait two weeks so that parents and taxpayers are fully informed about what is happening and can reasonably give necessary input. But as we’ve learned from previous experience, Richmond is not just any other community.

I can’t say it any better than school board member Carol Wolf, who sent a letter to council members asking them to postpone the vote: “Even if the paper were to be amended, a vote tonight would deny to the majority of Richmond citizens the opportunity the right to know what City Council is about to do.  Further, it denies to non-RPS parents and taxpayers an opportunity to address the issues in this paper.  The citizens of Richmond deserve to be able to read more than every other page of this document before City Council votes.”  

And isn’t it strange that when these kind of things occur, you can usually find the name “Bill Pantele” attached somewhere? Hmmmm….?

Update: At Monday’s meeting, Richmond City Council agreed that it might be a good idea that citizens actually get the chance to see what our legislators will be voting on BEFORE they vote. I realize that the idea of being fully informed about important decisions involving the future of our schools may seem like a wacky idea to some of the more “certifiable” representatives of the local blogosphere (no link necessary). But it looks like the council — including, it must be said, Bill Pantele — have decided that it is important, and have put the vote off for two weeks. Seems like a no-brainer to me too. Good show.

So little time, so much to blog about:

The city’s war on nightlife? What war on nightlife?
Oh, you mean THIS war on nightlife? You’d really have to be a “certifiable” apologist for the status quo in order to defend the city’s totally-illogical targeting of the Cotton Club and Club 534, as detailed in this week’s Style Weekly. Still, I’ve heard no staunch defenders of property rights out in the blogosphere or anywhere else standing up to denounce Richmond’s blatant harassment and targeting of nightclubs they don’t approve of — but can’t legally close down. This story shows that arguments made on behalf of public safety in the city’s continuing crackdown on nightclubs are, at best, overstated. [Great question: “Why should government officials lift restrictions on a more dangerous club in order to eliminate a less-dangerous one?”] But those of you who have been following the fierce opposition to the proposed Downtown Master Plan should read this piece immediately, if only to note (with eyebrows raised) how VCU’s current master plan reflects the taking over of the area around one property owner’s nightclub. Ah, but VCU claims that this particular part of its master plan doesn’t mean anything. OK, so maybe someone can explain again why Richmond’s own proposed downtown plan (which VCU and their surrogates strenuously object to because it doesn’t reflect “realities on the ground”) can’t say whatever the heck it wants too. After all, these things don’t really mean anything. Right? File this one under: “Disgraceful” and then file a duplicate copy under: “Repressive backwater.”

Speaking of “realities on the ground”…
If you ever wanted to know what the Richmond Times-Dispatch op ed page really thinks of the rest of us — as opposed to the region’s monied business community, which it seems to exist only to carry water for — just take note of the way these “jerks” use quote marks in this lame and intellectually-dishonest piece of tripe that masquerades as an editorial; you can read the reasons why this piece sucks lemons over at Urban Richmond. [Perhaps recognizing their blatant elitism was showing, the RTD editorialists attempt a kinder, gentler version of the same spiel today — it’s all the same hooey.] A reminder of a political chairman’s considerable and acknowledged ties to institutions that he does daily business with is not a “personal attack,” by the way. Meanwhile, the recent hit job this same bunch put on ousted W&M prez Gene Nichol — whose only real crime was to be an unapologetic liberal in a position of authority in the Commonwealth of Virginia — is more proof that this bunch receive their “opinions” from higher authorities. Quote to remember: “Just four months ago, we were calling for Nichol’s renewal.” Uh-huh.

Do as Bill says, not as Bill does
To have Bill Pantele lecture anyone on fiscal responsibility — even Doug Wilder — after he pushed the insiders-only, taxpayer-funded CenterStage deal through without an economic study… and with all the lies he threw around about fictitious “sub-contractor” issues… and with CenterStage’s president throwing him a campaign fundraiser a few weeks after the council vote… all while making sure that the Virginia Performing Arts Foundation was exempted from basic Freedom of Information laws… Well, it’s a bit like having Columbo lecture you on how to dress. In any case, considering his own track record, you can put this quote from Mr. Bosnia in the all-time Howler time capsule: “Our budget should reflect reality, not a fantasy.” This is more of that “reality on the ground,” I presume.

Goldman is Gold
Is it possible to buy advance tickets now for any forthcoming mayoral race debates between recently-announced candidate Paul Goldman and his former boss, Mr. Wilder? Hot ziggity!! I dare say the city could sell tickets to these events and raise a couple grand for the school system’s ADA compliance right there. As for those sage pol watchers who continue to suggest that somehow Wilder and Goldman are working in consort, they should put their fanciful knack for conspiracy theories to better and more productive use — like finding out who shot JFK from the grassy knoll, or locating all these supposed people that Rudy McCollum claims want him to run for mayor again.

Do as Doug says, Not as Doug does
And why would a debate between Goldman and his former boss be so entertaining and instructive? Wouldn’t you just love for the mayor to answer some of the tough questions that Goldman has brought to the fore on his radio show, on his now-discontinued blog and in his mass email missives to the press? [Again, I ask: Can you work in consort with someone and be their most devastating and damaging critic at the same time?] For example, Goldman brought up a great point recently: How can Mayor Wilder compare Richmond’s school spending to Norfolk’s in order to point out the inefficiency and waste of the Richmond schools administration, while at the same time downplay the same numbers that show the inefficiency and waste in his own administration. “This very analysis says the Wilder Administration wastes at least $20,000,000 a year on it’s own government spending,” Goldman says pointedly. Proving that there are but two rules in Richmond politics these days: One is that Doug Wilder doesn’t have to make sense. The other rule is that there is no other rule.

Reality check
But does any of that mean that Doug Wilder’s chosen targets are somehow exonerated? Afraid not. Everytime I start to think that things might be getting better at Richmond Public Schools (and I was, just the other day), something shocks me back to my senses. Honestly, could there be there be anything more basic than protecting the health of our young people during a nationally-advertised tainted food recall (only the biggest in history)? If the people in charge of RPS (or Chesterfield schools) can’t do something like this right, how can we expect them to competently handle anything else? You don’t have to answer that.

A longtime Save Richmonder writes in to ask:
What in the world do Henrico and Hanover elected officials have to do with the election of Richmond’s mayor anyway?

When Jon Baliles (AKA Snoopy) told me last week that he was thinking about accepting an offer from Doug Wilder to be a public information manager on the Mayor’s staff, I could tell he was on the fence about it. I remember feeling a little dizzy as I listened to him wrestle with the pros and the cons of the decision - and what a decision. Not only would taking a job like that neutralize the great, varied and often defiantly independent work that Jon does at the River City Rapids blog, it seemed to be the kind of position (and caliber of boss) that would hardly be a perfect fit for someone who has his own mind and his own slant on what is best for the city.

To quote Norm at Bacon’s Rebellion: “The only person on Doug Wilder’s team is Doug Wilder.” You got that right. Just ask Bill Farrar.

As we now know, Jon said yes. And the hire speaks volumes. Whatever reason Wilder might’ve had for asking Snoopy to take the job, there’s no doubt that this is a potent affirmation of the importance — and the growing influence — of Richmond’s blogging community.

But let’s also face facts, fellow bloggers: Agree or disagree with Jon’s views, there haven’t been many blogs like RCR around here (I can count them on one hand and have two fingers left over, actually), and this exit to the Big House will leave a serious vacuum on our regional series of tubes. The main reason I had for not wanting Jon to take the job was entirely selfish: I will miss reading, reacting, sometimes disagreeing but always being engaged and challenged by his singular takes on this city, its checkered past and its uncertain future.

Not to say that there aren’t some tough questions and concerns that this announcement brings to the fore. Not long after the news of Baliles’ new position hit the streets, political gadfly Paul Goldman sent out a screed that asked some tough questions about the mayor’s latest hiring move. Read Goldman’s take on the situation in its entirety here. Some key excerpts:

So let me get this straight: no money to cut taxes, no money for kids, no money for the elderly poor, but plenty of money for an “event planner” at City Hall during an election year apparently doing election year type things.

AND NOT A SINGLE MAYORAL HOPEFUL who says they can be trusted to be Mayor and change the way things operate at City Hall has the stones to say anything?

…the people of Richmond want someone who isn’t afraid to do what is right. Jon Baliles is a good guy, and his family has been good for Richmond. But adding an “event planner” to the city’s PR staff, as he was partially described in today’s RTD, is not what the people need right now, indeed it is more of the same, not change.

I can agree with most of that, but I would say it a different way. Rather than being asked to buttress an already-bloated PR department, Jon should have been asked to replace Linwood Norman, who is easily the most ineffective (to the point of being almost useless) political press secretary I’ve ever had the misfortune of (not) getting basic information from.

Some have suggested that Jon has been an “apologist” for Wilder on his blog. I can point to at least five different meaningful subjects where he has sharply and forcefully differed from the Mayor’s office — arts center, anyone? — but even if you could paint him as a defacto mouthpiece, he has been far more effective, and far more convincing, than anyone currently toiling for the Mayor in explaining what has been happening and not happening at City Hall; much more compelling and persuasive than Linwood Norman, who Snoopy will now work under. Seriously, who has done more to effectively lay out the case against Richmond’s dysfunctional, wasteful schools administration and its lax approach to accountability, and to communicate the tough and painful political realities of “change” in River City?

So, to my mind, the question shouldn’t be why was Jon Baliles hired to help “explain” the Mayor? — it should be: What took Wilder so long to bring him in? And why isn’t he being asked to run the whole department?

Have I agreed with everything Jon has written concerning the Mayor and some of the stupid, maddening, narcissistic and completely contradictory decisions and tactics of his administration? Absolutely not. Has his writing made me think twice, look again, see the other side with a bit more clarity and comprehension? Only every damn day.

So wear those new ties with pride, Snoopy. And if (or, more likely, when) Hizzoner disappoints you the way he’s disappointed so many others around here, I hope you know we’ve got a full bag of pure trimethylxanthine waiting for you when you return.